Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

Augeas

Moderators
  • Content count

    4,142
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Augeas

  1. If files larger than 4gb have been deleted - as opposed to a disk failure - then NTFS will overwrite all the file's cluster addresses. In that event the files aren't recoverable without professional help, and possibly not even then. It is theoretically possible for a deep scan file (with a [01234].ext name) to be in one contiguous 4gb+ extent, in which case that could be recovered, so it's worth a look.
  2. 20,000 files to sort through

    Nope, there isn't, not easily that is. The only thing that I can think of is to highlight the first excellent file, hold down shift, scroll down until the first poor, and then highlight the last excellent. Yes I know, there's a lot of files to scroll through.
  3. File recovery on a corrupted drive

    You can stop the scan at any point and Recuva will display whatever it's found up to that time. But as you say you don't want to recover deleted files that wouldn't be much use. You can select Scan for Non-Deleted File in Advanced Mode Options/Actions but you will still have to do the full scan of deleted files as well, there's not the facility to stop that. Have you selected deep scan? If so I would uncheck that and see what is produced with a normal scan.
  4. Why are odf documents opened in docx?

    Are you saying that Recuva found a .odf file (or many .odf fikles) on its scan, and when they were recovered it changed the extension to docx? I am highly unconvinced.
  5. What do you mean 'History'? Recuva doesn't recover Chrome, or Firefox, or anything specific, it recovers files. If an entry in the MFT is marked as deleted then Recuva will show it, and if it is still accessible then Recuva will recover it. If Recuva doesn't find what you're looking for then it isn't in the MFT. I don't know if you are putting anything in the file/path box, but if you are this often causes confusion.
  6. COULD NOT GOT THE REQUIRED RESULT

    Try runnung a scan with Scan for Non-Del;eted Files checked (in Advanced Mode, Options/Actions).
  7. Trying to recover because I'm a stupid

    Ho hum.. 'The drive must be able to hold at least x GB, and everything on the drive will be deleted.' 'Everything on the drive will be deleted. If you have any personal files on this drive, make sure you've backed up the drive.'
  8. Trying to recover because I'm a stupid

    You can run a Recuva normal or deep scan, and that's it. There are no ways to force Recuva to squeeze more files from the device. As that device is an SSD that's been overwritten, I think your chances of recovery are very slim.
  9. Missing data still missing but easeus finds it

    As none of us knows what Recuva or Easeus actually does then we can only speculate. The default settings of Recuva exclude files in hidden system directories, zero-byte files, and securely overwritten files, so this might explain some of the discrepancy. A normal scan reads the MFT (assuming NTFS) and selects deleted records, which is a relatively simple process. The MFT is the same whatever software is used, so it's difficult to see how one software would produce results that are significantly different from another. Recuva doesn't include live files by default, maybe Easeus does. A deep scan looks for a specific set of file headers in the clusters. There could be a variation in the file types covered, Recuva's list seems to cover most of the popular file types, perhaps Easus has more. I'm not really sure where recovery software could 'look' to find more files.
  10. Excluding a file extension

    No, and it wouldn't make the scan any faster. The deep scan has to examine the header of every cluster it finds to determine if it contains a valid file header, and if so add it to Recuva's dynamic list. So if you don't want jpegs then all the clusters would still have to be searched to check that they had a file header, and then discarded if the header was jpeg. You can run a deep scan once, with nothing in the file/path box, and then filter the results afterwards by whatever file extension you want, altering the filter as you go. Running a deep scan with a filter applied might enable the run to complete without memory problems, but that's something I can't test.
  11. There's no overwritten data because the files are all undeleted. They are system files which were created during the format and don't contain any data. $BadClus is a sparse file, which means that it's allocation extends to the full size of the drive but in reality it most likely doesn't occupy any space at all. A full format overwrites all cluster with zeroes. I would say that there's not a chance in a zillion that any data can be recovered from this drive.
  12. Have you tried any of the many suggestions on Google if you search for this message?
  13. Can Revuca find files twice?

    Recuva will find the same deleted files over and over again, until some activity on the scanned drive changes what is accessible.
  14. Saving recovered dialogue box

    Are you attempting to recover to the failed flash drive? If so, stop now.
  15. Saving recovered dialogue box

    No, I'm afraid not. You can save a copy of the found files list, but it's just a list, that's all. It can't be used to restart the recovery process. You have to recover from a current scan. I assume you're doing a Save to Clipboard and then saving that? That's very laborious. I don't know what you mean when you say that a recovery only produces a file called Dummy, I've never heard of that.
  16. Yes, one pass is enough. If you use Drive Wiper erase then the disk will be formatted to its original file system and then wiped. It's probably quicker to use a Windows full format (not the quick one), this will overwrite everything with zeroes. Yes, recovery will be impossible. I wouldn't do any of this on an SSD though. Perhaps a quick format and then a Defrag optimise will do the same thing. Leave the device installed until the optimise has had a chance to finish. Oh I dunno, a day or so.
  17. Recovering duplicate files

    There would be little point (and mayhem on this forum) in CC saving what it deleted. I could say backups, but the 'don't bother to backup' belief is far too ingrained to change.
  18. Recuva stop scanning

    The count of files found includes live files, and any other files excluded due to any scan filters or options. Presumably you wouldn't want to recover those.
  19. Recovering duplicate files

    Those buttons you mentioned - Save to Text File and Restore Results - are actions you perform on the list of duplicated files, not the files themselves (as indeed is explained at the end of H's link). No duplicate files are saved before deletion in CC and none can be restored by CC. If you wish to recover any files then try Recuva.
  20. Can't recover the same file twice

    There is nothing inherently wrong in recovering the same files twice, or as many times as you wish. In other words Recuva will not change any deleted file in the source drive. But there is an however: If youi have recovered the files to a separate drive the source will be unchanged. If you have reinstated the recovered files to the source drive then some deleted file records in the MFT will be overwritten. This could cause loss of access to the original deleted files. If youi have recovered the files to a same drive the source then again some deleted file records in the MFT will be overwritten. This could cause loss of access to the original deleted files. If any activity has taken place on the source drive then some, or many, deleted file records in the MFT will be overwritten. This could cause loss access to of the original deleted files. 'Hiding' half a million files is not what Recuva does. We would need to see screenshots at least to try and establish what has happened.
  21. Free hosting - any advice?

    I wonder if anyone has any advice on this: I help to run a small and informal jazz club, with monthly concerts. I look after a simple website and send out approx 300 emails in one go once a month with a reminder of that month’s concert. I have a registered domain name, the website is hosted on my TalkTalk webspace, and the emails are sent from my personal email address with the return address spoofed to indicate it comes from the jazz domain. All quite simple, but it works. TalkTalk are no longer offering webspace after mid July. I have in mind migrating to a free hosting provider. I’ve looked at a few, AwardSpace, FreeVirtualServers, Hostinger, 20i, 000WebHost etc. All would provide ample space and bandwidth. My dilemma is: 1) I need to be able to redirect my existing domain to the new web address. Some free hosters make you transfer your domain name, but I’d prefer the freedom of not doing that. 2) Emails. Most of the above severely limit the number of emails you can send, down to 30 a month or no more than ten in one go. That would obviously not be at all suitable. I could continue in the same way as now, but it would be nice to move the emailing away from my personal setup. Any advice or help on free hosting in this sort of setup would be appreciated, even if it’s don’t go there. Thanks. I’m UK by the way.
  22. The second contentious check box above is meaningless in the free version, as you don't supply any contact information. As for the first, you - meaning everybody - have already granted permission to use your data when you accepted the terms and conditions. There's a lot of self-righteous indignation here. No more data is being collected than before, but now you won't use the product? I should advise you to stop looking at the website, just see how much info is collected from those fleeting moments of innocent pleasure. Personally I don't really care two monkeys'. My usage data is utterly irrelevant in terms of human existence. This is the opposite of when we were asked what browser we wanted to use, and we kept being asked until we had to beg Please, No More - This One - Now Go Away!
  23. That's enough squabbling, thanks.
  24. No, try it yourself, in Advanced mode if necessary. Read the bit about dates.
  25. 96 GB RAM not enough??

    That's me trying to be too clever. When Recuva scans it holds all its info in memory as it doesn't write to the disk, for obvious reasons. When it runs a recovery I can't see a reason why much more is held in memory - a recovery log I suppose, which can be quite large with 48 million files to be recovered. But your original post says that you're running out of ram, and your second post says you're running out of disk space. Post two also says on the bottom line that 48 million files are being recovered after the pic filter has been applied. You are biting off a great deal, perhaps more than Recuva can chew.
×